Consistency beats realism
A brand world doesn’t have to be realistic to work. Calvin Ross Carl explains why believability beats realism, and why specificity is what makes an imagined future feel true.
Summary
Calvin Ross Carl argues that people forgive weirdness, but not inconsistency. If a brand says it’s magical one moment and totally practical the next, that inconsistency creates a problem. That’s why Calvin likes to construct a world for believability rather than realism. When you’re imagining a future, he says, specificity is the most important part.
Highlights
- People forgive weirdness, but not inconsistency.
- Mixed messages, magical one moment and practical the next, break belief.
- Build for believability, not realism, and lean on specificity.
Key insights
Believable isn’t the same as realistic
A brand world doesn’t have to mirror reality. It has to hold together on its own terms.
Specificity sells the future
Vague futures feel fake. Precise details make an imagined world feel like a place you could visit.
Detailed analysis
Calvin’s distinction gives brands permission to be ambitious. Realism limits a brand to what already exists, while believability lets it build something new as long as the rules hold. Specific, consistent details are what keep that world from falling apart.
Conclusion
Aim for believable, not realistic. Be specific, and stay consistent.
The reason you can go really deep on that absurdity is that people forgive weirdness. Weirdness is okay, but they don’t forgive inconsistency. If in one thing you’re trying to say it’s magical, but then it’s, “No, don’t worry, it’s totally practical,” that inconsistency always creates a problem.
So the reason I like thinking about constructing a world for believability—not necessarily realism, not to reflect the real world as we all understand it—is that when we’re imagining a future, specificity is kind of the most important part.